Re: Cheap SLRs
It is a puzzle isn't it? Switching for that reason alone gains people nothing. Except, maybe, some sense of striking back at Pentax for doing what Nikon has been doing for a while already. Len --- This is TOTALLY bizarre! People will switch to Nikon because Pentax makes a couple of entry level lenses that lack aperture rings just like entry level Nikon lenses. This makes a lot of sense!! Pål _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was: FAJlenses)
Hi, Pål Jensen wrote: A couple of years back we didn't know where Pentax was going. After whining on this list and Pentax lists in Japan, Pentax have deliberately leaked out where they are going in order to please the fan base. 1. I am not talking about leaks. I am talking about a clear published statement with reasons for their choice and with a rough time-schedule of future products. 2. Pentax has not leaked any information to me... You keep writing pompous mails on this list pretending to know something, and you know just as little as we all do. Your secret sources have proven themselves to be no more reliable than looking into a crystal ball. I require a clear statement (from Pentax, not from you). The short version of their philosophy is continuous concentration of the low end market, more emphasis on niche, enthusiast products (like the MZ-S and the Limited lenses), continue supporting their MF systems and full force ahead into digital, including DSLR's. This is neither a philosophy nor a strategy. This is more like randomly running in different directions, trying to make a buck from all sides. No wonder so few NEW customers invest seriously in Pentax (I am not talking about the MZ-60 buyers here)... Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __
Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was: FAJ lenses)
Hi! FK Its not that I don't care what every function the camera has or does, its FK just that I take photos the same way I've always done. I had my Z70 for FK about 6 months before I realised that the thing had programme modes (I just FK put accidently on A one day). Never bothered to use it full auto after that FK anyway. I USE MY MZS THE SAME WAY I USE MY K1000. I know that theres for eg FK a multiexposure setting but I just never use it. There are some cameras that FK would work fine in green mode and probally give me the same results as when FK I set it manualy, but for me it is a tool, used to take photos, my final FK outcome is somehow more important than worrying about every function I have FK on the camera. And there are some models that require you to walk around FK with the manual just to switch the thing on. I've only been taking photos FK for about 8 years and I feel I am better off working on my composition than FK worrying about fps. That's one fascinating opinion. Especially the part that I took liberty to capitalize. Well, different strokes for different people... I prefer, as I said, to know my tools as fully as it takes to read the manual, even to read the manual several times. But, obviously looking at our photographs no one would be able to say what mode the camera was set to... --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was:FAJlenses)
1. I am not talking about leaks. I am talking about a clear published statement with reasons for their choice and with a rough time-schedule of future products. But Boz, this can never happen. It ignores the reality of producing products for a market. The company cannot make the decision as to which way it will go. It has to be responsive, not prescriptive. Look at Olympus--in 1984, Olympus was one of the largest SLR systems, official camera of Magnum Photo agency, and vied with Nikon for allegiance among serious SLR shooters. Then they made the decision not to go with autofocus. (Why? The bean-counters said it could not be profitable, because three other companies, Minolta, Canon, and Nikon, had already gone to AF, and saturated the market.) Result? By 1987 Olympus OM line was in serious trouble, and now it is defunct. What if Pentax said in 1982 We make interchangeable lens SLRs. We will not make point-and-shoot one-piece cameras. Goodbye! What if it said in 1996 We make film cameras. We do not make digital cameras. Road to ruin! A company cannot make promises for the future. It cannot know what the market of the future will want to buy. Also, we may mistake the reason why companies conceal their new products. It's not to keep their customers in the dark. It's to avoid tipping off the competition to their plans! Nikon caught Canon napping with its D1 digital SLR and stole that market for more than a full year. Olympus guessed right in 1971 that buyers wanted smaller, lighter cameras and it catapulted its whole line to success. Canon successfully guessed with the AE-1 that polycarbonate would be the material of the future and sold more AE-1s than any camera had ever sold up to that time. There are dozens if not hundreds of examples of new innovations catching the competition unawares and earning market share for the innovator. This doesn't last forever. The competition catches up sooner or later. They must make their profit while they can. Manufacturers want to hide what they are doing FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE so as to extend the critical period during which their new products may have an advantage over competitors. THIS is why companies do not announce their future plans! --Mike
Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was: FAJlenses)
Boz wrote: 1. I am not talking about leaks. I am talking about a clear published statement with reasons for their choice and with a rough time-schedule of future products. I suggest you then find a company who do just that. It don't exist to my knowledge. 2. Pentax has not leaked any information to me... You keep writing pompous mails on this list pretending to know something, and you know just as little as we all do. Pentax have leaked information wholesale to the media and it find its way to the PDML. If you expect personal notifications you are being unreasonable. Yeah, I know just as little as we all do as most of what I know have been shared on the PDML. Pentax have exposed their market strategy the last couple of years and at this years PMA we will see that they are going exactly the way they have been claiming. There are far less information coming from Nikon and Canon. You should be lucky you're not a Minolta users. They have left their customers completely in the dark. Companies just don't give detailed product schedule for competitive reasons. What Pentax have already gives is best you can hope for. They have been very responsive. Eg. this fall, after countless claims that Pentax would never ever release a DSLR, they leaked to the japanese media that they wouild indeed market such a camera. Pål
Re: Cheap SLRs
Mike Johnston said: But Boz, this can never happen. It ignores the reality of producing products for a market. The company cannot make the decision as to which way it will go. It has to be responsive, not prescriptive. But they can and should have a broad business strategy. How do they plan to position themselves as SLR manufacturers? Do they plan to hit the low end? Will they make another attempt at professional users? Do they plan to waffle indefinitely without a clear strategy? If we know that much we could at least make some good guesses as to IS, USM, and so on. If they want to appeal to pros, they need the new technology. If they don't care for the pro market, then that new technology becomes iffy.
Re: Cheap SLRs
If we know that much we could at least make some good guesses as to IS, USM, and so on. If they want to appeal to pros, they need the new technology. If they don't care for the pro market, then that new technology becomes iffy. They're definitely not a pro company. That has much more to do with a Professional Services arm than it has to do with equipment. I've heard some estimates as to what it would cost Pentax to establish a Professional Services division, and I forget what the quotes were, but it was well up in the millions. So it really would make no sense for Pentax to become a pro company at this point. --Mike
Pentax busiess strategy (WAS: Re: Cheap SLRs)
Gregory wrote: But they can and should have a broad business strategy. How do they plan to position themselves as SLR manufacturers? Do they plan to hit the low end? It is a hopeless task really. Even if their business strategy was posted here a week ago it won't help. Nor does the fact that it come up every few months the last five years or so. Some will still miss it unless they get a private mail from Pentax. Even then it will be forgotten in two weeks time. Pentax cannot make everyone happy nor should they. They should safely ignore the whiners who want their favourite 1984 model camera repeated. Pentax cannot either formulate a rigid model plan and stick to it. Any competitive company must react quickly to market changes; things might not have been apparent two years previously. Pntax will continue the market policy they've subscribed to in the last few years for the near future. Will they make another attempt at professional users? Do they plan to waffle indefinitely without a clear strategy? They never made an attempt at professional users and doubt they will in the future as well. If we know that much we could at least make some good guesses as to IS, USM, and so on. If they want to appeal to pros, they need the new technology. If they don't care for the pro market, then that new technology becomes iffy. New technology is perhaps more important for the amateur not to mention how the brand is perceived. Pål
Re: Cheap SLRs
Keith Whaley said: Gregory L. Hansen wrote: Mike Johnston said: But Boz, this can never happen. It ignores the reality of producing products for a market. The company cannot make the decision as to which way it will go. It has to be responsive, not prescriptive. But they can and should have a broad business strategy. How do they plan to position themselves as SLR manufacturers? Do they plan to hit the low end? Will they make another attempt at professional users? Do they plan to waffle indefinitely without a clear strategy? If they did, why ever would they tell you? Or, if you want, us? Knowledge of a competitor's plans for evolution of their products and the guarding of your OWN plans is more secret and more zealously guarded than most top secret Government work. Industrial espionage is widely practiced, very sophisticated and in-house protection of design secrets is severe. I have worked in both industries, and I guarantee you that commercial security can be more strict...at least in the areas of product design. Because a broad business strategy usually isn't sensitive information. Everyone already knows they make cameras! Because it's the sort of thing that investors will want to know about. Because it could reassure current Pentax users that are threatening to jump to Nikon when FAJ lenses are introduced. Because it could encourage manufacturers of third-party equipment, and a large pool of third-party equipment does make a brand more attractive to new customers despite some possible lost sales of lenses and accessories. Because if they have professionals in mind they could start building awareness of their brand. All it might take is for some rag like Business Week to interview a corporate officer. Specific products and launch dates can be sensitive. But which direction you want to take the business is the sort of thing that's usually pretty public, or at least the sort of thing that doesn't matter much to competitors. What would Canon do if they learned Pentax was going to release IS lenses, produce some of their own? Try harder to make their lenses better? Come on...
Re: Cheap SLRs
Gregory wrote: Because a broad business strategy usually isn't sensitive information. Everyone already knows they make cameras! Because it's the sort of thing that investors will want to know about. They have done so more times than I care to remember Because it could reassure current Pentax users that are threatening to jump to Nikon when FAJ lenses are introduced. This is TOTALLY bizarre! People will switch to Nikon because Pentax makes a couple of entry level lenses that lack aperture rings just like entry level Nikon lenses. This makes a lot of sense!! Pål
Re: Cheap SLRs
Please see interlaced comments... Gregory L. Hansen wrote: Keith Whaley said: Gregory L. Hansen wrote: Mike Johnston said: But Boz, this can never happen. It ignores the reality of producing products for a market. The company cannot make the decision as to which way it will go. It has to be responsive, not prescriptive. But they can and should have a broad business strategy. How do they plan to position themselves as SLR manufacturers? Do they plan to hit the low end? Will they make another attempt at professional users? Do they plan to waffle indefinitely without a clear strategy? If they did, why ever would they tell you? Or, if you want, us? Knowledge of a competitor's plans for evolution of their products and the guarding of your OWN plans is more secret and more zealously guarded than most top secret Government work. Industrial espionage is widely practiced, very sophisticated and in-house protection of design secrets is severe. I have worked in both industries, and I guarantee you that commercial security can be more strict...at least in the areas of product design. Because a broad business strategy usually isn't sensitive information. Everyone already knows they make cameras! Because it's the sort of thing that investors will want to know about. We, the Pentax owners, are very probably not investors, or stockholders. If we were, we wouldn't have been bitching on a public forum about how the company does their business...and expecting the mto divulge their near term plans to the world. Investors DO get that info. Curious product owners do not. Because it could reassure current Pentax users that are threatening to jump to Nikon when FAJ lenses are introduced. You mean, 'the sky is falling' hoi-polloi? Har! Because it could encourage manufacturers of third-party equipment, and a large pool of third-party equipment does make a brand more attractive to new customers despite some possible lost sales of lenses and accessories. Because if they have professionals in mind they could start building awareness of their brand. All it might take is for some rag like Business Week to interview a corporate officer. Not if the company is savvy at all. They don't set company strategy on rumor and hear-say reports like that. If they did, they wouldn't be in business for long... Specific products and launch dates can be sensitive. But which direction you want to take the business is the sort of thing that's usually pretty public, or at least the sort of thing that doesn't matter much to competitors. Not so. Especially if a company is branching out into an area of business his competitor is pursuing, but he has not yet entered. You NEVER give them the satisfaction of knowing which way your company is going in the near future. Not ever! What would Canon do if they learned Pentax was going to release IS lenses, produce some of their own? Try harder to make their lenses better? Come on... I stand by my opinion stated above... keith whaley
Re: Cheap SLRs
Hi Gregory, Thanks for making my point better than I did! Greetings from a Boilermaker, Boz Keith Whaley said: If they did, why ever would they tell you? Or, if you want, us? Gregory L. Hansen wrote: Because a broad business strategy usually isn't sensitive information. Everyone already knows they make cameras! Because it's the sort of thing that investors will want to know about. Because it could reassure current Pentax users that are threatening to jump to Nikon when FAJ lenses are introduced. Because it could encourage manufacturers of third-party equipment, and a large pool of third-party equipment does make a brand more attractive to new customers despite some possible lost sales of lenses and accessories. Because if they have professionals in mind they could start building awareness of their brand. All it might take is for some rag like Business Week to interview a corporate officer. Specific products and launch dates can be sensitive. But which direction you want to take the business is the sort of thing that's usually pretty public, or at least the sort of thing that doesn't matter much to competitors. What would Canon do if they learned Pentax was going to release IS lenses, produce some of their own? Try harder to make their lenses better? Come on... -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __
Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was: FAJlenses)
However, it may hurt some brand loyal people to realize that their favorite company is doing some, how to put it, odd things. I suppose that MZ-60 with some FAJ zoom attached is operationally no more complicated that any film PS. Boris, Lots of people like to, or need to, use their cameras as point-and-shoots. I wrote next Sunday's column about the Bronica RF645 medium-format rangefinder, and I heard from one fellow who successfully uses that camera as a p/s. I also know of a very famous photojournalist who claims not to know all the controls on her Leica SLR...she says she just knows how to set it so that it works for her, and that's enough. It's hard for US to believe, but many people just need to take pictures, and are not interested in the camera equipment or how all the camera controls work! Also, it's not really uncommon for companies to react to the market and provide what the market seems to be interested in. Canon has very cheap consumer lenses, for instance. It is to be hoped that Pentax will not move towards making all new lenses with no aperture ring. But when many dealers are successfully selling inexpensive SLRs with one or two zooms in preference to actual point-and-shoots, that's a good thing--and it's smart for Pentax to encourage its dealers to sell real Pentax lenses as opposed to independent offerings. More money in Pentax's pockets. --Mike
Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was: FAJlenses)
Mike,I looked at a used Bronica RF645 during Christmas and, despite its size,found it a nice camera to hold.Focus, controls all smooth. I then went and tried the Fuji GS645 folder i went originally to see and felt a big diference right a away.Like the Bronica much better. If i can save up enough cash,it and the SQ will be looked at very hard. As a RF type camera though,how do you compose/compensate with the longer focal lenghts,i'm curious.One of these cameras is at least 2 years away. Dave Begin Original Message From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] Boris, Lots of people like to, or need to, use their cameras as point-and- shoots. I wrote next Sunday's column about the Bronica RF645 medium-format rangefinder, and I heard from one fellow who successfully uses that camera as a p/s. Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Art needs to be in a frame.That way we know when the art stops and the wall begins--Frank Zappa http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was: FAJlenses)
Hi Mike, Mike Johnston wrote: It is to be hoped that Pentax will not move towards making all new lenses with no aperture ring. But when many dealers are successfully selling inexpensive SLRs with one or two zooms in preference to actual point-and-shoots, that's a good thing--and it's smart for Pentax to encourage its dealers to sell real Pentax lenses as opposed to independent offerings. More money in Pentax's pockets. I guess that this is my real fear. If Pentax chooses to compete in this segment only or primarily, then I as an involved amateur have nothing more to take from Pentax. I wouldn't even be too sad (there are nice offerings form other manufacturers), but Pentax should come out and say what their strategy for the future is!!! Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __
OT now: Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was:FAJlenses)
Begin Original Message From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dave, You ought to buy it now if you can. Bronica is offering a $450 rebate until March. That makes the RF645 and the 65mm normal lens cost about $1150, which is a screaming bargain. Thanks Mike. This works out to about $1900 Can.:)Not bad Unfortunatly i spent most of my camera saveup cash on a new, to me, AF body on the weekend.Have to start fresh now.g Dave Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Art needs to be in a frame.That way we know when the art stops and the wall begins--Frank Zappa http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was:FAJlenses)
On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, Mike Johnston wrote: I don't know if you read about Bethlehem Steel cutting off its former workers' pensions. I'm sure it never expected that it would be down to 20% of its peak workforce. Read about Bethlehem Steel? You should try LIVING here.. I think every male member of the maternal side of my family worked for the steel or a related company. Not alot of happy people around, of course, its not quite as bitter now as it was when they were closing the Bethlehem plant and cutting jobs left and right. Yeap. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was: FAJ lenses)
Hi! I usually enjoy reading your longer posts. This one was no exception. MJ It's hard for US to believe, but many people just need to take pictures, and MJ are not interested in the camera equipment or how all the camera controls MJ work! Here I agree, but still, I think that if I paid three-digit figure in dollars for my camera it deserves a little bit of my time that is needed for reading the manual. Then, having read the manual, I as a matter of habit, tend to try to use all the features of the darn thing. Though of course I admit that it took me roughly one whole year to (re)discover that my stereo switched off after an hour of playing if it woke up in alarm clock mode... Usually I did all my morning stuff and departed in less than an hour. Anyway, it is probably a certain amount of shame that people don't really care about what really their camera does in order to let them enjoy the outcome... --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!! (was: FAJlenses)
Arnold wrote: Boz wrote: Pentax should come out and say what their strategy for the future is! Well, in 2000 Pentax told us their plans with the MZ-D, and then they wisely changed plans. So maybe it really is better not to unveil product news until the products can really be bought. I believe that Pentax will be faithful to the k-mount as long as they will produce SLRs. The FA-Junk lenses cannot point to the general direction as MZ3/MZ5N and MZ-S are not even able to manually control the aperture on them. I think Pentax is very aware that compatibility is their very strength. A couple of years back we didn't know where Pentax was going. After whining on this list and Pentax lists in Japan, Pentax have deliberately leaked out where they are going in order to please the fan base. The short version of their philosophy is continuous concentration of the low end market, more emphasis on niche, enthusiast products (like the MZ-S and the Limited lenses), continue supporting their MF systems and full force ahead into digital, including DSLR's. Pål
RE: Cheap SLRs, WAS: K and M lenses are now obsolete!!!(was:FAJlenses)
You ought to buy it now if you can. Bronica is offering a $450 rebate until March. That makes the RF645 and the 65mm normal lens cost about $1150, which is a screaming bargain. ARGH! As I point out in my column next Sunday, the RF645 kit is less expensive that most medium format normal lenses, and even a couple of top-end 35mm normal lenses. With the camera thrown in for free Argh, indeed. s --Mike
